If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Phoenix Coldon, a junior at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, has been missing since Dec. 18, 2011. Phoenix was last seen in the driveway of the family's home at about 3 p.m.

The Coldon family lost their life savings and their home because of a cruel hoax that led to a false lead in the disappearance of their daughter.

Please take a moment and let Phoenix's family know you care. Please CLICK HERE and read about the case of missing Phoenix Coldon

well as a mother you have to remember whether she was wearing diapers/underwear or not, also I´d tell my husband if she was wetting the bed and wearing them, police did not ask JR about it ?
I do think if she was asleep that evening when they arrived after the Whites,PR would have to wake her up to going to the bathroom or she put diapers as she was preparing her to bed,and maybe she was also dursty and drunk that pinapple juice before going to bed,
but I do believe she had to remember about a lot of thinks she did "forget"

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BOESP For This Useful Post:

I’m surprised that the majority of poll voters think JR abused JB. Other than access and the fact that he’s male, is there any evidence that suggests he physically abused his daughter? His living daughter said she was never abused, no pornography was found out in the house and no other persons have accused him of child molestation. Is the thought that victims just haven’t come forward or are we to accept that he ONLY molested JB? Just wondering the reasoning here. Thank you.

I’m surprised that the majority of poll voters think JR abused JB. Other than access and the fact that he’s male, is there any evidence that suggests he physically abused his daughter? His living daughter said she was never abused, no pornography was found out in the house and no other persons have accused him of child molestation. Is the thought that victims just haven’t come forward or are we to accept that he ONLY molested JB? Just wondering the reasoning here. Thank you.

Read Andrew G. Hodges on the case. He makes a compelling argument. Within the space of a few years, John had lost his older daughter, his father, and his wife had stage 4 ovarian cancer. Add to that Patsy 1) told people she didn't like sex and 2) had sexualized JonBenet and it's more than possible that John, dealing with the trauma of these deaths and illnesses and the pain of a distant wife, turned to his daughter for comfort.

well as a mother you have to remember whether she was wearing diapers/underwear or not, also I´d tell my husband if she was wetting the bed and wearing them, police did not ask JR about it ?
I do think if she was asleep that evening when they arrived after the Whites,PR would have to wake her up to going to the bathroom or she put diapers as she was preparing her to bed,and maybe she was also dursty and drunk that pinapple juice before going to bed,
but I do believe she had to remember about a lot of thinks she did "forget"

"Drank pinapple juice before going to bed." Sorry, haven't heard that before. But have read accounts that she ate fresh pineapple as the contents of her stomach showed. jmo

well as a mother you have to remember whether she was wearing diapers/underwear or not, also I´d tell my husband if she was wetting the bed and wearing them, police did not ask JR about it ?
I do think if she was asleep that evening when they arrived after the Whites,PR would have to wake her up to going to the bathroom or she put diapers as she was preparing her to bed,and maybe she was also dursty and drunk that pinapple juice before going to bed,
but I do believe she had to remember about a lot of thinks she did "forget"

There was no pineapple juice, only fresh-cut pineapple in a bowl.

THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

I’m surprised that the majority of poll voters think JR abused JB. Other than access and the fact that he’s male, is there any evidence that suggests he physically abused his daughter? His living daughter said she was never abused, no pornography was found out in the house and no other persons have accused him of child molestation. Is the thought that victims just haven’t come forward or are we to accept that he ONLY molested JB? Just wondering the reasoning here. Thank you.

When you have a child of that age who exhibits physical signs of sexual contact (in JB's case, there was the eroded hymen, exposure of the vaginal rugae, unusually large vaginal canal which indicate chronic abuse, as well as the blood on the forchette, which is a part of the vagina, blood in other areas of the vagina, bruising of the labia and blood wiped from the thighs and pubic area , all of which are evidence of sexual contact that happened that night) it is apparent that someone with regular, private access to JB was abusing her. The chronic aspect of the abuse was not a one-time event. Kids that age are not in situations where that kind of abuse can occur unless it is with someone who is repeatedly with the child alone.
Like it or not, until the case is solved with a known, NAMED killer every person in the home that night must be considered a suspect in the events of that night, and every family member, including parents and siblings, must be suspect in the chronic abuse.
So to answer your question, it isn't because he was male- females can be abusers, too. It is because he was THERE to have committed the abuse. There need not be evidence of child pornography and there need not have been molestation of other children. In fact, often in an abuse situation, only one child is targeted, for a variety of reasons. If it was JR, it was more of a situational abuse, and not true pedophilia. He wasn't attracted to ALL little girls- just THIS little girl, because she was presented as sexualized 20 year old.
SOMEONE in that family was abusing her. Until that person is exposed, JR will continue to be a suspect. There are at least three other suspects. Patsy, BR, and half-brother JAR (who was frequently in the home, as he attended college right in Boulder).

THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

DeeDee, thanks for your response. I still find him being the highest vote on the poll somewhat surprising and it's a stretch for me to believe he would start molesting his 6 year old daughter when he'd not shown signs of that before in his life. But I understand how it fits with many people's theories of events leading up to her death and subsequent coverup.

The Following User Says Thank You to Abrego For This Useful Post:

DeeDee, thanks for your response. I still find him being the highest vote on the poll somewhat surprising and it's a stretch for me to believe he would start molesting his 6 year old daughter when he'd not shown signs of that before in his life. But I understand how it fits with many people's theories of events leading up to her death and subsequent coverup.

Abrego, have you read Steve Thomas's book on JonBenet? His theory is that Patsy accidentally killed JonBenet while meting out corporal punishment precipitated by JonBenet soiling herself. The "corporal punishment" is not graphically addressed but he seems to mean Patsy used very rough, invasive cleaning methods consistent with the injuries seen via JonBenet's autopsy report.

Some have speculated that douching could have been involved. Others have suggested Patsy digitally applied topical medication to JonBenet's vagina over a period of time.

I am one of the one's who believes the evidence, as available to the public, is consistent with Thomas's theory. I haven't seen any argument yet that persuades me otherwise.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BOESP For This Useful Post:

Abrego, have you read Steve Thomas's book on JonBenet? His theory is that Patsy accidentally killed JonBenet while meting out corporal punishment precipitated by JonBenet soiling herself. The "corporal punishment" is not graphically addressed but he seems to mean Patsy used very rough, invasive cleaning methods consistent with the injuries seen via JonBenet's autopsy report.

Some have speculated that douching could have been involved. Others have suggested Patsy digitally applied topical medication to JonBenet's vagina over a period of time.

I am one of the one's who believes the evidence, as available to the public, is consistent with Thomas's theory. I haven't seen any argument yet that persuades me otherwise.

BOESP,
Steve Thomas' theory is not consistent with the available forensic evidence. Coroner Meyer at autopsy verbally opined that JonBenet had sustained sexual contact and digital penetration.

BOESP,
Steve Thomas' theory is not consistent with the available forensic evidence. Coroner Meyer at autopsy verbally opined that JonBenet had sustained sexual contact and digital penetration.

Was Patsy molesting JonBenet?

.

I disagree. He didn't fully explain what he meant by corporal punishment. Corporal punishment can include digital penetration from a female caregiver, not just digital penetration for sexual gratification or only by a male. What I remember is a statement from Arndt, who we are told attended the autopsy, and Arndt saying that Meyer said she had been digitally penetrated. Is there more?

I agree JonBenet had "sexual contact" although I don't think that necessarily equates with sexual gratification. I think corporal punishment can equate with "sexual contact."

It is my opinion that Patsy did not molest JonBenet for sexual gratification. I believe it was done for cleansing purposes and the corporal punishment as mentioned by Thomas. I can speculate on what that means but it wouldn't accomplish anything and might start more myths, which this case doesn't need.

There is only one other alternative that I would consider and that involves Burke. I'm not partial to that alternative.

Can you point me to the quotation for Meyer's verbal statement about the sexual contact that explains how she had sexual contact with a male (or have I misunderstood what you are saying???).

Last edited by BOESP; 04-24-2012 at 08:01 PM.
Reason: Added last paragraph.

When you have a child of that age who exhibits physical signs of sexual contact (in JB's case, there was the eroded hymen, exposure of the vaginal rugae, unusually large vaginal canal which indicate chronic abuse, as well as the blood on the forchette, which is a part of the vagina, blood in other areas of the vagina, bruising of the labia and blood wiped from the thighs and pubic area , all of which are evidence of sexual contact that happened that night) it is apparent that someone with regular, private access to JB was abusing her. The chronic aspect of the abuse was not a one-time event. Kids that age are not in situations where that kind of abuse can occur unless it is with someone who is repeatedly with the child alone.
Like it or not, until the case is solved with a known, NAMED killer every person in the home that night must be considered a suspect in the events of that night, and every family member, including parents and siblings, must be suspect in the chronic abuse.
So to answer your question, it isn't because he was male- females can be abusers, too. It is because he was THERE to have committed the abuse. There need not be evidence of child pornography and there need not have been molestation of other children. In fact, often in an abuse situation, only one child is targeted, for a variety of reasons. If it was JR, it was more of a situational abuse, and not true pedophilia. He wasn't attracted to ALL little girls- just THIS little girl, because she was presented as sexualized 20 year old.
SOMEONE in that family was abusing her. Until that person is exposed, JR will continue to be a suspect. There are at least three other suspects. Patsy, BR, and half-brother JAR (who was frequently in the home, as he attended college right in Boulder).

There is much truth in this statement. I know from experience. Thank you DeeDee249 for posting it!

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Flatlander For This Useful Post:

I disagree. He didn't fully explain what he meant by corporal punishment. Corporal punishment can include digital penetration from a female caregiver, not just digital penetration for sexual gratification or only by a male. What I remember is a statement from Arndt, who we are told attended the autopsy, and Arndt saying that Meyer said she had been digitally penetrated. Is there more?

I agree JonBenet had "sexual contact" although I don't think that necessarily equates with sexual gratification. I think corporal punishment can equate with "sexual contact."

It is my opinion that Patsy did not molest JonBenet for sexual gratification. I believe it was done for cleansing purposes and the corporal punishment as mentioned by Thomas. I can speculate on what that means but it wouldn't accomplish anything and might start more myths, which this case doesn't need.

There is only one other alternative that I would consider and that involves Burke. I'm not partial to that alternative.

Can you point me to the quotation for Meyer's verbal statement about the sexual contact that explains how she had sexual contact with a male (or have I misunderstood what you are saying???).

That is exactly what I believe and it got out of hand that night with JB physically fighting her mother. I think NP was behind this corporal cleansing idea as well. It has been claimed that NP said she was only "molested a little bit" but I have never been able to find out if she really did.

ETA: Pam & Dr.B should be re-interviewed because I believe they were aware of this too.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Limaes For This Useful Post:

Abrego, have you read Steve Thomas's book on JonBenet? His theory is that Patsy accidentally killed JonBenet while meting out corporal punishment precipitated by JonBenet soiling herself. The "corporal punishment" is not graphically addressed but he seems to mean Patsy used very rough, invasive cleaning methods consistent with the injuries seen via JonBenet's autopsy report.

Some have speculated that douching could have been involved. Others have suggested Patsy digitally applied topical medication to JonBenet's vagina over a period of time.

I am one of the one's who believes the evidence, as available to the public, is consistent with Thomas's theory. I haven't seen any argument yet that persuades me otherwise.

Corporal punishment is a form of physical punishment that involves the deliberate infliction of pain as retribution for an offence, or for the purpose of disciplining or reforming a wrongdoer, or to deter attitudes or behaviour deemed unacceptable. The term usually refers to methodically striking the offender with an implement, whether in judicial, domestic, or educational settings.

What ST stated on pg 253 in his book is thus: In mid-September, a panel of pediactric experts from around the country reached out of the major conclusions of the investigation - that JBR had suffered vaginal trama prior to the day she was killed. There were no dissenting opinions among them on the issue, and they firmly rejected the possibility that the trama to the hymen and chronic vaginal inflammation were caused by urination issues or mastrabation. We gathered affidavits stating in clear language that these were injuries "consistent with prior trama and sexual abuse" ... "There was chronic abuse" ... "Past violation of the vagina" ... "Evidence of both acute injury and and chronic sexual abuse." In other words, the doctors were saying it had happened before. One expert summed it up well when he said the injuries were not consistent with sexual assault but a with a child who was being physically abused.

According to ST a much more likely cause of the injuries to his way of thinking was some sort of corporal punishment being leted out as discipline if JonBenet wet or soiled the bed. That possibly was buttressed by the absence of semen on the body and an expert's opinion that the vaginal and hymenal damage was not due to an act of sexual gratification.

It makes perfect sense to me. Not that I would ever consider doing such a thing but understanding the implications of abuse personally.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Flatlander For This Useful Post:

I disagree. He didn't fully explain what he meant by corporal punishment. Corporal punishment can include digital penetration from a female caregiver, not just digital penetration for sexual gratification or only by a male. What I remember is a statement from Arndt, who we are told attended the autopsy, and Arndt saying that Meyer said she had been digitally penetrated. Is there more?

I agree JonBenet had "sexual contact" although I don't think that necessarily equates with sexual gratification. I think corporal punishment can equate with "sexual contact."

It is my opinion that Patsy did not molest JonBenet for sexual gratification. I believe it was done for cleansing purposes and the corporal punishment as mentioned by Thomas. I can speculate on what that means but it wouldn't accomplish anything and might start more myths, which this case doesn't need.

There is only one other alternative that I would consider and that involves Burke. I'm not partial to that alternative.

Can you point me to the quotation for Meyer's verbal statement about the sexual contact that explains how she had sexual contact with a male (or have I misunderstood what you are saying???).

I have read ST's book and I'm in total agreement with what you've said here, including your comment about Burke. And I've interpreted "digital" to mean anything resembling the size and shape of finger. I don't understand how it could be determined her injuries were solely from digital penetration.

I have read ST's book and I'm in total agreement with what you've said here, including your comment about Burke. And I've interpreted "digital" to mean anything resembling the size and shape of finger. I don't understand how it could be determined her injuries were solely from digital penetration.

Digital would generally mean "finger" although the term "consistent with digital penetration" leaves the door open somewhat. I can't remember exactly how the autopsy was worded.

Injuries sustained can be identified by markers consistent with certain events. Penal penetration leaves different signs than digital although I would think a douche nozzle or any insertion wand for certain medications could mimic digital penetration.

Patsy could have used a speculum to assist for cleansing and medicating. Douching is another option. Who knows? I don't but Steve Thomas does.

I'm going to throw out a thought that is PURE SPECULATION. I've often wondered if Patsy had to restrain JonBenet in order to carry out the punishment or cleansing thus the need to use cord in the staging.

The Following User Says Thank You to BOESP For This Useful Post:

Digital would generally mean "finger" although the term "consistent with digital penetration" leaves the door open somewhat. I can't remember exactly how the autopsy was worded.

Injuries sustained can be identified by markers consistent with certain events. Penal penetration leaves different signs than digital although I would think a douche nozzle or any insertion wand for certain medications could mimic digital penetration.

Patsy could have used a speculum to assist for cleansing and medicating. Douching is another option. Who knows? I don't but Steve Thomas does.

I'm going to throw out a thought that is PURE SPECULATION. I've often wondered if Patsy had to restrain JonBenet in order to carry out the punishment or cleansing thus the need to use cord in the staging.

digital in this context means finger or toe so to distinguish it entirely from the use of any other object.

Now the penetration and contact need not be simultaneous, Coroner Meyer could be alluding to two seperate events, e.g. an assault and staging.

If JonBenet's internal injuries had arisen soley from Patsy applying cleaning agents, why were none found in the house, no forensic traces left inside JonBenet, why did the majority of pediatricians interviewed consider sexual abuse as the likely cause?

Nobody doubts, at regular intervals, that Patsy applied topical cream onto JonBenet, so to soothe her skin, irritated by wetting the bed, and a general lack of hygiene.

But the underlying cause of all this and the reason for JonBenet's death and the crime-scene staging was her sexual abuse!

digital in this context means finger or toe so to distinguish it entirely from the use of any other object.

Now the penetration and contact need not be simultaneous, Coroner Meyer could be alluding to two seperate events, e.g. an assault and staging.

If JonBenet's internal injuries had arisen soley from Patsy applying cleaning agents, why were none found in the house, no forensic traces left inside JonBenet, why did the majority of pediatricians interviewed consider sexual abuse as the likely cause?

Nobody doubts, at regular intervals, that Patsy applied topical cream onto JonBenet, so to soothe her skin, irritated by wetting the bed, and a general lack of hygiene.

But the underlying cause of all this and the reason for JonBenet's death and the crime-scene staging was her sexual abuse!

I've read the autopsy and Arndt's deposition and I can not conclude from that, that JonBenet was abused for sexual gratification. Could you point the way to the statement you are referring to? TIA

Digital would generally mean "finger" although the term "consistent with digital penetration" leaves the door open somewhat. I can't remember exactly how the autopsy was worded.

Injuries sustained can be identified by markers consistent with certain events. Penal penetration leaves different signs than digital although I would think a douche nozzle or any insertion wand for certain medications could mimic digital penetration.

Patsy could have used a speculum to assist for cleansing and medicating. Douching is another option. Who knows? I don't but Steve Thomas does.

I'm going to throw out a thought that is PURE SPECULATION. I've often wondered if Patsy had to restrain JonBenet in order to carry out the punishment or cleansing thus the need to use cord in the staging.

While a douche wand is common in many households, a speculum is not. A speculum would be found in a gynecologist's office. I am sure her pediatrician didn't have one-it is not common equipment for a pediatrician either. A child in need of that type of exam would have to be anesthetized and it would be done by a specialist. An adult-sized speculum would not be used. I would state with reasonable certainty that Patsy did not use a speculum on JB. I recall that Dr. Boef, her pediatrician, said that although he examined her, he admitted that he never did an internal exam- which required a speculum.
The housekeeper LHP reported that she used to hear Patsy and JB in the bathroom, lot of screaming and crying. But I doubt she tied her up. JB had no marks on her wrists in death, either, and had she been tied up that night for "cleansing", there would certainly be marks on her wrists at the time she was found. When marks are made on a living person (bruises, etc) they so not heal after death, so they would still be visible, just as the red ligature furrow was still visible.
The more common type of disposable douche would also have caused some erosions and injuries as well, even if no wand was used.
But the coroner should have been able to make the distinction as to whether she had been penetrated by a penis. The wand is shorter than an erect adult penis, and I am sure there would be different types of injuries, perhaps further up in the vaginal canal.

THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:

While a douche wand is common in many households, a speculum is not. A speculum would be found in a gynecologist's office. I am sure her pediatrician didn't have one-it is not common equipment for a pediatrician either. A child in need of that type of exam would have to be anesthetized and it would be done by a specialist. An adult-sized speculum would not be used. I would state with reasonable certainty that Patsy did not use a speculum on JB. I recall that Dr. Boef, her pediatrician, said that although he examined her, he admitted that he never did an internal exam- which required a speculum.
The housekeeper LHP reported that she used to hear Patsy and JB in the bathroom, lot of screaming and crying. But I doubt she tied her up. JB had no marks on her wrists in death, either, and had she been tied up that night for "cleansing", there would certainly be marks on her wrists at the time she was found. When marks are made on a living person (bruises, etc) they so not heal after death, so they would still be visible, just as the red ligature furrow was still visible.
The more common type of disposable douche would also have caused some erosions and injuries as well, even if no wand was used.
But the coroner should have been able to make the distinction as to whether she had been penetrated by a penis. The wand is shorter than an erect adult penis, and I am sure there would be different types of injuries, perhaps further up in the vaginal canal.

Which leads me to a question about the splinters found inside JB. I do believe that it would be really hard to break a paintbrush as it were. So considering this do you suppose it was whittled?

Which leads me to a question about the splinters found inside JB. I do believe that it would be really hard to break a paintbrush as it were. So considering this do you suppose it was whittled?

ST mentioned the splinters in the vagina- but they were never officially listed in any report. The autopsy mentions "birefringent material", doubt that this is the splinters. There was "cellulose" mentioned, which COULD be the wood splinters. To me, avoiding the word "splinter or wood shards" is deliberate and meant to deceive.
We don't know whether the paintbrush was "whittled" or simply broken/snapped- but there were wood splinters that were shown to have come from that broken paintbrush in the basement near the paint tray that the brush came from. The Swiss Army knife was also found nearby. The knife could have been used to slice or saw the brush handle as whittling would have take much longer.

THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:

ST mentioned the splinters in the vagina- but they were never officially listed in any report. The autopsy mentions "birefringent material", doubt that this is the splinters. There was "cellulose" mentioned, which COULD be the wood splinters. To me, avoiding the word "splinter or wood shards" is deliberate and meant to deceive.
We don't know whether the paintbrush was "whittled" or simply broken/snapped- but there were wood splinters that were shown to have come from that broken paintbrush in the basement near the paint tray that the brush came from. The Swiss Army knife was also found nearby. The knife could have been used to slice or saw the brush handle as whittling would have take much longer.

On November 5, Detective Weinheimer arrived in St. Clair Shores, Michigan, to meet Dr. Werner Spitz, one of the world’s foremost forensic pathologists. Weinheimer took with him a stack of black-and-white photographs of the cellulose that coroner John Meyer had found in JonBenét’s vagina.
…
Finally, the detectives turned to the microscopic splinter of cellulose found in JonBenet’s vagina, which looked like wood. The broken paintbrush that had been tied to the stick was splintered into shards. Logic suggested that a splinter of wood might have stuck to the perpetrator’s finger before he or she penetrated JonBenét vaginally. It could also have broken off the end of the paintbrush if the stick, rather than a finger, was used to penetrate her.
Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Lawrence Schiller, pages 557, 559

“It saddens me that 20 years after my sister Nicole’s murder, we are still seeing the same crimes, just different names, over and over again.”
- Denise Brown (sister of Nicole Brown Simpson)

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to cynic For This Useful Post:

On November 5, Detective Weinheimer arrived in St. Clair Shores, Michigan, to meet Dr. Werner Spitz, one of the world’s foremost forensic pathologists. Weinheimer took with him a stack of black-and-white photographs of the cellulose that coroner John Meyer had found in JonBenét’s vagina.
…
Finally, the detectives turned to the microscopic splinter of cellulose found in JonBenet’s vagina, which looked like wood. The broken paintbrush that had been tied to the stick was splintered into shards. Logic suggested that a splinter of wood might have stuck to the perpetrator’s finger before he or she penetrated JonBenét vaginally. It could also have broken off the end of the paintbrush if the stick, rather than a finger, was used to penetrate her.
Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Lawrence Schiller, pages 557, 559

cynic,
Well thats pretty clear, the splinters are wood. I reckon where the autopsy mentions "birefringent material", its intended to either to project a sense of neutrality, or hide in plain sight that a foreign object had been inserted inside JonBenet.

Coroner Meyer's reference to digital penetration suggests a finger was used, so depositing the splinter, which could have come from the broken paintbrush handle.

So how does the latter view square with the ST's Corporal Punishment Theory, well only if you see the digital penetration as some form of staging. Which is consistent with the application of the paintbrush handle as a garrote.

The same applies if the missing piece of the paintbrush handle was used and left inside JonBenet, details of which may have been redacted?

So ST's theory is consistent until you consider Coroner Meyer's verbatim opinion that JonBenet was subject to sexual contact and that she was unnaturally enlarged, and that a majority of pediatric experts thought JonBenet had sustained chronic abuse.

To keep it consistent, either Patsy was both molesting and applying Corporal Punishment to JonBenet or someone else was also independently molesting JonBenet?

Looks to me as if the wine-cellar staging was enacted to mask the prior molestation?